Nigerian music icon David Adeleke, popularly known as Davido, has been given a 21-day ultimatum by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York to respond to allegations of intellectual property theft. According to court documents obtained by Peoples Gazette, the case was filed by four Nigerian artists who claim Davido misappropriated their original work to produce one of his latest tracks.
The plaintiffs—Martins Chukwuka Emmanuel, Abel Great Umaru, Kelvin Ayodele Campbell, and David Ovhioghena Umaru—accuse Davido of unlawfully using their 2022 song, Work, as the foundation for his 2024 release titled Strawberry on Ice. The lawsuit, lodged on April 4, 2025, also names Sierra Leonean singer Emmerson Amidu Bockarie (known professionally as Emmerson), Carlos Jenkins, Matthew Quinney, Marques Miles II, and Wynn Records, the label responsible for publishing and distributing the track in question.
Origins of the Dispute
The matter dates back to early 2022, when the four plaintiffs claim they shared a demo version of Work with Davido as part of a proposed collaborative effort. According to their legal filings, the group had hoped the collaboration would provide a breakthrough into mainstream success, leveraging Davido’s global platform.
However, instead of honoring the implied spirit of collaboration, Davido allegedly repurposed the track without consent. The group alleges that Davido subsequently handed over the demo to Emmerson, who then incorporated specific instrumental and vocal elements from Work to create a new version—what ultimately became Strawberry on Ice.
Attempts at Resolution
Following the song’s release, the plaintiffs claim they made repeated efforts to contact Davido in a bid to resolve the issue amicably. After several months of outreach, the parties reportedly entered into a settlement agreement on March 14, 2025. Under the terms of the agreement, Davido committed to a lump sum payment of $45,000 to the group.
In addition to the financial compensation, Davido also agreed to allocate a share of future earnings derived from the disputed song. Specifically, he pledged to give the plaintiffs 40% of royalties linked to the song’s underlying composition and 20% of royalties from the sound recording. These payments were to be made no later than March 24, 2025.
Despite these commitments, Davido allegedly failed to meet the agreed terms, prompting the plaintiffs to escalate the matter legally. According to the documents filed in New York federal court, the failure to pay and uphold the royalty agreement left the plaintiffs with no choice but to pursue judicial redress.
Legal Claims and Relief Sought
In their filing, the plaintiffs assert that the defendants engaged in direct copyright infringement and unauthorized use of their intellectual property. They have asked the court to formally recognize that Davido and his associates unlawfully copied and profited from their original work.
The group is seeking statutory damages totaling $150,000, as well as the legal transfer of 40% ownership of the composition rights and 20% of the sound recording rights associated with Strawberry on Ice. Beyond financial compensation, they are requesting a permanent injunction that would prevent Davido and the other defendants from further infringing on their existing or future copyrighted works.
The case is particularly notable given the high profile of the artist involved. Davido, who has built an international fanbase with numerous hits and accolades—including Grammy nominations—has yet to issue any public comment on the case. Efforts by Peoples Gazette to obtain a response from the singer went unanswered as of press time. Representatives for Wynn Records, also named in the suit, declined to comment on the matter.
Broader Implications
This lawsuit brings renewed attention to longstanding issues in the music industry, particularly the unauthorized use of creative content and the exploitation of lesser-known artists. While it is not uncommon for disputes over song ownership and royalties to arise, this case is particularly significant given the cross-continental dimension and the prominence of the individuals involved.
The plaintiffs argue that the misuse of their intellectual property not only deprived them of deserved credit and revenue but also impeded their professional growth. The case raises broader questions about ethics, collaboration, and accountability in a fast-evolving music industry that often leaves independent artists vulnerable.
Next Steps
As the case moves forward, Davido and his co-defendants are required to appear before the court or file a formal response within 21 days of the filing date—meaning no later than April 25, 2025. Failure to respond within the court’s stipulated timeframe could result in a default judgment in favor of the plaintiffs.
The outcome of this case could set a legal precedent for how intellectual property disputes involving international parties are handled in U.S. courts. Legal experts say it could also influence how artists and record labels approach collaborations and demo submissions going forward.
Until then, the global music community will be closely watching how this high-profile dispute unfolds.
